How should children’s books depict slavery? (op-ed)
My title reincarnates the literary debate of 2011: Should a publisher replace the N-word with “slave” in Mark Twain’s classic novel?
Huckleberry Finn was criticized after it was published in 1885 for obscenity, atheism, coarse manners, low moral tone, and anti-southernism, and after school desegregation in the 20th century the novel was condemned as racist.
The reason was the N-word appeared in the novel 219 times.
Proponents of the notion that history fostered self-esteem felt black students shouldn’t be introduced to a character that used a dehumanizing term regardless of the novel’s historical reality.
So the book was banned in most public schools.
Then a Mark Twain scholar suggested to a publisher to replace the N-word with “slave”. He said, “After talks [on Twain] … [Teachers] said we would love to teach this novel … but we feel we can’t do it anymore. In the new classroom, it’s not acceptable.” So a race-sensitive edition of Huckleberry Finn was published in 2011.
But what else is not acceptable in the “new classroom”?
Recently Scholastic Publishing decided to stop distribution of a children’s book (Ages 7-10 32 pages) titled A Birthday Cake for George Washington after a barrage of bad reviews.
There was no N-word, but the illustrator depicted George Washington’s chef, a slave named Hercules, smiling with his daughter while baking for the first president.
A School Library Journal reviewer said the illustrations “covey a feeling of joyfulness that contrasts starkly with the reality of slave life”.
The writer, a journalist and cookbook author, stated: The story was intended to show the “complex and varied nature of enslaved existence” including people who had a better quality of life than others and ‘close’ relationships with those who enslaved them. The writer continued: Enslaved people were often depicted in children’s literature as foolish or happily insensible of their condition. Counteracting the industry’s previous wrongs were recent books like Henry’s Freedom Box, but the range of human emotion and behavior is vast and there is room in between how the literary world depicted historical African American characters and how it does now. We must be mindful that we don’t judge historical figures by modern viewpoints.”
The book also contained an appended note explaining that Hercules was a real person, considered by some culinary historians as “the first celebrity chef in America” and he eventually escaped but his children remained enslaved their entire lives.
But the writer’s intentions were considered reprehensible and the book was denounced as a false representation of slavery.
But the realistic representation of the N-word in Huckleberry Finn was considered too harsh for young readers, back then the mandate was positive images for self-esteem, and now A Birthday Cake for George Washington is removed from the market for leaving the harshness of slavery out.
Has the audience matured (7-10 year olds?) or has the mandate changed? Better yet why is the depiction of the brutality of slavery demanded from this specific book?
One critic stated “George Washington became a slaveholder at eleven”, and suggested personal information like this would be a better lesson for students.
So the hostility behind the criticism of smiling slaves wasn’t generated by a false depiction of slavery. The book failed to meet the “new school” expectation of counteracting history by portraying a founding father as an evil slaveholder.
The problem here isn’t the book it’s the criticism. It has no literary merit. It all stems from the vantage point of social science. Social science analyzes how social conditions influence the individual. But the purpose of literature is to examine the human condition to prove human beings are not simple products of their respective environments.
Mark Twain once said, “I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.” But in this case “new schooling” was the interference.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 1/27/16
Huckleberry Finn was criticized after it was published in 1885 for obscenity, atheism, coarse manners, low moral tone, and anti-southernism, and after school desegregation in the 20th century the novel was condemned as racist.
The reason was the N-word appeared in the novel 219 times.
Proponents of the notion that history fostered self-esteem felt black students shouldn’t be introduced to a character that used a dehumanizing term regardless of the novel’s historical reality.
So the book was banned in most public schools.
Then a Mark Twain scholar suggested to a publisher to replace the N-word with “slave”. He said, “After talks [on Twain] … [Teachers] said we would love to teach this novel … but we feel we can’t do it anymore. In the new classroom, it’s not acceptable.” So a race-sensitive edition of Huckleberry Finn was published in 2011.
But what else is not acceptable in the “new classroom”?
Recently Scholastic Publishing decided to stop distribution of a children’s book (Ages 7-10 32 pages) titled A Birthday Cake for George Washington after a barrage of bad reviews.
There was no N-word, but the illustrator depicted George Washington’s chef, a slave named Hercules, smiling with his daughter while baking for the first president.
A School Library Journal reviewer said the illustrations “covey a feeling of joyfulness that contrasts starkly with the reality of slave life”.
The writer, a journalist and cookbook author, stated: The story was intended to show the “complex and varied nature of enslaved existence” including people who had a better quality of life than others and ‘close’ relationships with those who enslaved them. The writer continued: Enslaved people were often depicted in children’s literature as foolish or happily insensible of their condition. Counteracting the industry’s previous wrongs were recent books like Henry’s Freedom Box, but the range of human emotion and behavior is vast and there is room in between how the literary world depicted historical African American characters and how it does now. We must be mindful that we don’t judge historical figures by modern viewpoints.”
The book also contained an appended note explaining that Hercules was a real person, considered by some culinary historians as “the first celebrity chef in America” and he eventually escaped but his children remained enslaved their entire lives.
But the writer’s intentions were considered reprehensible and the book was denounced as a false representation of slavery.
But the realistic representation of the N-word in Huckleberry Finn was considered too harsh for young readers, back then the mandate was positive images for self-esteem, and now A Birthday Cake for George Washington is removed from the market for leaving the harshness of slavery out.
Has the audience matured (7-10 year olds?) or has the mandate changed? Better yet why is the depiction of the brutality of slavery demanded from this specific book?
One critic stated “George Washington became a slaveholder at eleven”, and suggested personal information like this would be a better lesson for students.
So the hostility behind the criticism of smiling slaves wasn’t generated by a false depiction of slavery. The book failed to meet the “new school” expectation of counteracting history by portraying a founding father as an evil slaveholder.
The problem here isn’t the book it’s the criticism. It has no literary merit. It all stems from the vantage point of social science. Social science analyzes how social conditions influence the individual. But the purpose of literature is to examine the human condition to prove human beings are not simple products of their respective environments.
Mark Twain once said, “I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.” But in this case “new schooling” was the interference.
First published in the New Pittsburgh Courier 1/27/16
Comments
Post a Comment